smc SMC-S1

[Ddsr]

I wanted to ask a question about SMC-S1 specifically from the CAVC–Buie (5) v. Shinseki (0) (2011) case. My situation is similar, and I was not awarded SMC-S1 upon 100% scheduler award. My interest is why does this continue to happen? Is it due to few Veterans even know about the SMC-S1? My thoughts are this is true or veterans just do not fight this much so the VA continues to now award the SMC-Veteran's because they use the bullcrap argument that more than one SC was used to give the veteran the IU. Reading the Buie case shows clearly that it does not matter in what order the SC were given as long as there is the 60% or more for one SC and the other qualification which is another single rated at 60%. Currently I am waiting for my Rep which as well who is waiting for his decision for the SMC-S1 battle which is similar to my case. I will fight this upon his decision to see how that goes. Mainly I am curious as to your thoughts as to why the VA continues to not award the SMC-S1 automatically as they state they will do, but in fact again use the well the IU was awarded for more than one SC

[broncovet]

Mr. Cue:

    You posted:

Quote

The court has rule how the veterans affairs should be handling this.

 

  As Berta pointed out, the "court did not rule" how the VA should be handling this, because, Howell was a REMAND, not a reversal.  "Remands" are not finally adjuticated, but instead the remand term means that the Veteran "can" submit new evidence" to support his position, but the court "gives the decision making authority" to a lower court, such as BVA. 

    Like yoursself, I also thought Howell meant all Vets with TDIU should automatically get SMC S, based on congress intent.  I do think this issue "is ripe" for a great attorney to "hold VA accountable" to "congress intent" described. 

     Unfortunately, VA has a plan in place to make sure they dont have to pay SMC S for each and every tdiu Vet. 

That plan is as follows:

1.  Neglect to adjuticate SMC S, so Vets are confused. 

2.  "If" the confused Vet figures it out, delay it as long as possible, hopefully until the Veteran dies or is too weak to fight, so it remains unresolved. 

3.  If, however, the Veteran is young enough to withstand the many planned and unplanned delays/denials, "sick a team of VA appointed lawyers" on the Vet so that either a denial can be crafted, or, as a last resort, the VARO grants benefits so it can not be hailed as "precedential". 

4.  In no case, will the VA allow a Veteran "to give up the VA farm" by getting a "blanket" (precedent setting) case enabling all TDIU vets to get SMC S.  The VA always has the option, when backed into a corner by a smart law firm, of granting the benefit at the VARO level, "shutting up" the Veteran, but not setting a precedent for others.   Remember, the Same VASEC controls VARO, BVA, CAVC.  

 

(Repeat the above steps for each Vet insisting on enforcment of Howell).   

Howell, because its a remand, does not give blanket SMC S to each tdiu Vet..at least not yet.  

 

[Mr cue]

3 hours ago, Mr cue said:

Because the meaning of the term “substantially confined” is ambiguous and there is no regulatory interpretation, “the Court must determine the meaning” of the term “and the Board’s obligation” thereunder

So did the court determine the mean of substantailly confine.

I thing ppl are making to much of it.

[Berta]

We have to make too much of it-, because the VA does . and HB depends on medical evidence.

https://search.usa.gov/search?affiliate=bvadecisions&sort_by=&query=HB+substantially+confined&commit=Search

Before I even filed a SMC CUE,  I read multiple BVA decisions to see what the term "substantially AND PERMANENTLY confined" meant, I read remands, denials and awards.

There are only 86 decisions at the BVA, that show exactly why they awarded, denied, or granted or SMC HB.

But you are right- I am making too much of it-and have no further replys I could possible make.

I narrowed down 40,996 BVA cases to about 990 but am no longer  interested or have the time to find what apears to be Howell's decision  there.

 

[Mr cue]

Last thing

4 minutes ago, Berta said:

Before I even filed a SMC CUE,  I read multiple BVA decisions to see what the term "substantially AND PERMANENTLY confined" meant, I read remands, denials and awards

Berta I am not try to start anything but.

If the court say the phrase was  substantially AND PERMANENTLY confined

Means not been able to leave one home to make a income.

And the court stated it had to rule on what it means.

an they did

You will not find a bva decision granting Howell.

Because it was granted at the ro on remand from bva.

They was never going to let that decision see the light of day. In a bva site.

My opinion.

We will all see soon I am at the court and they will have to address it this time.

[Ddsr]

9 hours ago, john999 said:

I had TDIU and when I got an extra 60% the VA did not automatically grant me "S".  I filed a claim for it and VA called CUE on themselves and granted it with retro.  Usually  VA does nothing without making a claim IMO.  They tend to drag their feet when it comes to granting anything not actually claimed.   I took AO exam.  They found three AO conditions, but I would never have gotten anything without an official claim.  This really gets me where VA identifies a SC condition and just sits there and waits twenty years for you to claim it.

Yep thats why im fighting the SMC not being added. I was 80% IU then received an extra 90% Hearing Loss which then gave me the Scheduler 100%

[GBArmy]

Dustoff 11 Congrats to you; sometimes the good guy wins! Nice to hear. You may want to consider making a donation from your back pay to Hadit so we can continue to advise and hear great news like yours; That is, if you haven't already done so. In any case, congrats!